Relationship Details

This document is a cover sheet for 'Exhibit N' attached to Defendant Bradley J. Edwards's Statement of Undisputed Facts in the legal case Epstein v. Edwards (Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG). It indicates the document is part of a larger legal filing and bears a House Oversight production stamp.

This document is Page 2 of a legal filing titled 'Notice of Filing Transcript In Supplemental Support of Bradley Edwards' Motion for Summary Judgment' in the case of Edwards adv. Epstein (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG). It contains a 'Counsel List' providing the contact information (firm name, address, phone, and fax) for five attorneys: Bradley J. Edwards, Jack A. Goldberger, Marc S. Nurik, Tonja Haddad Coleman, and Lilly Ann Sanchez. The document is Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017489.

This document is a legal filing dated December 10, 2015, in which Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, Paul Morris, files a 'Notice to Invoke Discretionary Jurisdiction' with the Supreme Court of Florida. Epstein is appealing a decision made on November 12, 2015, by the District Court of Appeal (Fourth District) in the case of 'Bradley J. Edwards v. Jeffrey Epstein'. The attached opinion reveals that the lower court reversed a summary judgment that had favored Epstein, ruling that 'litigation privilege' does not bar Edwards' claim of malicious prosecution against Epstein.

This is a legal motion filed on December 14, 2015, in the Supreme Court of Florida (Case No. SC15-2286) by Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, Paul Morris. Epstein requests an extension of time until January 19, 2016, to file his initial brief on jurisdiction. The document notes that the Respondent's counsel, Philip M. Burlington, has no objection to the request, and includes a service list of attorneys involved in the related proceedings.

This document contains court orders from the Supreme Court of Florida dated December 15, 2015, regarding the case Jeffrey Epstein v. Bradley J. Edwards (Case No. SC15-2286). The court stayed proceedings pending the outcome of a separate case (Debrincat v. Fischer) and denied Epstein's motion for an extension of time as moot. The first page shows an envelope addressed to attorney Marc S. Nurik that was stamped 'Return to Sender' and filed/cleared by the clerk on December 28, 2015.

A corrected order from the Supreme Court of Florida dated May 3, 2017, in the case of Jeffrey Epstein vs. Bradley J. Edwards. The court orders the Petitioner (Epstein) to show cause by May 18, 2017, why the court should not decline jurisdiction based on the precedent of Debrincat v. Fischer. The document lists service to several attorneys including Marc S. Nurik and Jack Alan Goldberger.

This document is a legal response filed on May 18, 2017, in the Supreme Court of Florida by Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, Paul Morris. In response to a court order dated May 3, 2017, Epstein's counsel concedes that they cannot show cause why the precedent set in 'Debrincat v. Fischer' should not control the case, effectively advising the court that it should decline to exercise jurisdiction over Epstein's petition.

A 2017 Supreme Court of Florida order denying Jeffrey Epstein's petition for discretionary review in his case against Bradley J. Edwards. The court declined jurisdiction following a review of the response to a show cause order. The document lists the concurring justices and the individuals served with the order, including various attorneys and clerks.

This document is an official 'Acknowledgment of New Case' from the Supreme Court of Florida, dated December 11, 2015. It confirms the receipt of a 'Notice to Invoke Discretionary Jurisdiction' filed on December 10, 2015, in the case of Jeffrey Epstein vs. Bradley J. Edwards (Case No. SC15-2286). The document lists relevant case numbers from the lower tribunal and copies various attorneys and clerks involved in the matter.

This document is a cover sheet for 'Exhibit N' attached to Defendant Bradley J. Edwards's Statement of Undisputed Facts. It pertains to the legal case 'Epstein v. Edwards, et al.', with Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp.

A Florida Supreme Court order dated December 11, 2015, notifying Jeffrey Epstein (Petitioner) that he failed to pay the required $300.00 filing fee for his case against Bradley J. Edwards. The court set a deadline of January 11, 2016, to pay the fee or file for insolvency, warning that failure to do so would result in final dismissal of the case.

This document is the cover page for the deposition of Scott Rothstein, taken on June 14, 2012, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The deposition is part of a civil lawsuit (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG) filed by Jeffrey Epstein against Scott Rothstein and Bradley J. Edwards in the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County. The document includes a Bates stamp indicating it is part of a House Oversight Committee production.

This document is page 3 of a legal filing (likely a Motion for Summary Judgment) arguing that Jeffrey Epstein's lawsuit against attorney Bradley J. Edwards should be dismissed. The text argues that Epstein cannot sue Edwards while simultaneously asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege ('sword and shield' doctrine) to avoid answering questions about sexual abuse. It also notes that Epstein recently settled three cases handled by Edwards for amounts significantly higher than the 'minimal value' Epstein claimed they were worth.

Cover page for the deposition of Scott Rothstein taken via video conference on June 14, 2012. The deposition is part of a civil lawsuit (Case No. 502009CA040800XXXXMBAG) filed by Jeffrey Epstein against Scott Rothstein and Bradley J. Edwards in the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Florida. The document bears a House Oversight stamp.

This document outlines facts regarding Scott Rothstein's Ponzi scheme at the law firm RRA. It specifically addresses allegations that Rothstein used cases against Jeffrey Epstein—handled by attorney Bradley J. Edwards—to lure investors. The text defends Edwards, stating he worked at RRA for less than a year, had no knowledge of the fraud, and never substantively discussed the Epstein cases with Rothstein.

This document is the first page of a Renewed Motion for Final Summary Judgment filed by Bradley J. Edwards in a civil lawsuit brought by Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach County, Florida (Case No. 50 2009CA 040800...). Edwards argues that there is no evidence he participated in fraud against Epstein and asserts that his actions were legitimate legal representation of three clients (L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe) whom Epstein sexually abused. The document is marked as Exhibit B and bears a House Oversight Bates stamp.

This document is the cover page for the videotaped deposition of Jeffrey Epstein, taken on March 17, 2010. The deposition was for a civil case in Palm Beach County, Florida, where Epstein was the plaintiff against defendants Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Edwards, and an individual identified as L.M. The document includes the case number, location of the deposition, and details of the court reporting agency.

This document is the final page of an affidavit signed by attorney Bradley J. Edwards on September 21, 2010. In it, Edwards states that Jeffrey Epstein filed a complaint against him with the Florida Bar alleging involvement in 'Rothstein's scheme,' which the Bar investigated and dismissed. Edwards affirms that his actions in prosecuting claims against Epstein were ethical and based on good faith beliefs representing his clients.

This document is a condensed transcript (Pages 1-4) of a videotaped deposition of Bradley J. Edwards, taken on March 23, 2010, in West Palm Beach, Florida. The case involves Jeffrey Epstein as the plaintiff against Scott Rothstein, Bradley J. Edwards, and L.M. Notable attendees included Jeffrey Epstein himself and his legal team, including Alan Dershowitz.

This document is page 22 of a legal filing arguing that defendant Bradley J. Edwards is entitled to summary judgment against plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein based on the affirmative defense of privilege/absolute immunity. The text cites various Florida case laws regarding litigation privilege and concludes by asking the court to grant judgment in Edwards' favor on the remaining claim.

This is a legal filing from the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County in a case where Jeffrey Epstein is suing Bradley J. Edwards and Scott Rothstein. Edwards is responding to Epstein's Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that Epstein's claims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process are meritless. The text details Epstein's allegation that Edwards and Rothstein used sexual assault lawsuits against Epstein to 'pump' cases for Rothstein's Ponzi scheme investors, an allegation Edwards vehemently denies.

This is a 'Statement of Undisputed Facts' filed by Defendant Bradley J. Edwards in a civil case brought by Plaintiff Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach County, Florida (Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG). The document asserts that Epstein has a sexual preference for young children, citing a deposition from March 17, 2010, where Epstein invoked the Fifth Amendment. A footnote argues that Edwards is entitled to an adverse inference regarding Epstein's silence.

This document is page 4 of a legal motion titled 'Second Renewed Motion for Leave to Assert Claim for Punitive Damages' in the case Edwards adv. Epstein. The text argues that Epstein's lawsuit against attorney Bradley J. Edwards was baseless, filed out of malice to intimidate Edwards and his clients (L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe), and that Epstein has voluntarily dismissed his claims. It explicitly states that Epstein sexually abused these three clients and refutes allegations that Edwards was involved in a 'Ponzi Scheme' against Epstein.

This document is a 'Statement of Undisputed Facts' filed by defendant Bradley J. Edwards in a civil case brought by Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach County, Florida (Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800XXXXMBAG). The filing asserts as Fact #1 that Epstein has a 'sexual preference for young children,' citing a deposition from March 17, 2010. A footnote details that during this deposition, Epstein invoked his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent regarding this subject, which Edwards argues allows for an adverse inference against Epstein.

This document is a 'Certificate of Service' page from a legal filing dated January 17, 2014. It certifies that attorney William B. King served a copy of 'Edwards' Opposition to Epstein's Motion for Summary Judgment' via E-Serve. The document lists the contact information for the law firm Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., representing Bradley J. Edwards.

This document is the final page of a legal affidavit signed by attorney Bradley J. Edwards on September 21, 2010. In the text, Edwards attests that Jeffrey Epstein filed a complaint against him with the Florida Bar alleging involvement in 'Rothstein's scheme,' which was investigated and dismissed. Edwards declares that his actions in prosecuting claims against Epstein were ethically proper and done in good faith to represent his clients.

This document is a 'Notice of Filing' submitted to the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County on May 17, 2011, in the case of Jeffrey Epstein vs. Scott Rothstein, Bradley Edwards, and L.M. Attorney Jack Scarola, representing Bradley Edwards, filed a transcript of a telephone interview with Virginia Roberts to support a motion for punitive damages against Epstein. The document includes a certificate of service indicating it was mailed to opposing counsel.

This document, likely a legal filing or committee report, details how attorney Scott Rothstein operated a Ponzi scheme at his firm RRA between 2005 and 2009, falsely selling settlement agreements to investors. It clarifies that attorney Bradley J. Edwards, who prosecuted cases against Jeffrey Epstein, was briefly employed by RRA but had no knowledge that Rothstein was using the Epstein cases to lure investors into the fraud.

This document is an email dated September 18, 2009, from legal assistant Jacquie Johnson (working for Bradley Edwards at Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler) to Tama Kudman. The email serves to confirm the scheduling of a deposition for 'Mr. Bruhnel' (likely Jean-Luc Brunel) regarding the Epstein case, set for November 3rd at 10:00 a.m. The document is marked as 'Exhibit L' and contains a House Oversight Bates stamp.